Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- From: Roger Pearse <roger_pearse@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 26 Apr 2007 03:24:47 -0700
On 25 Apr, 10:45, ken...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
In article <1177399497.108504.152...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
roger_pea...@xxxxxxxxxxx (Roger Pearse) wrote:
The
oft-repeated statements that "Mithras was born of a virgin" (etc) are
all in fact false, and no such statements are to be found in
antiquity.
As far as I know very little is known about Mithras and all the
information that is known comes from archaeology.
Almost right, but not quite. I went out and collected all the ancient
literary references:
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras
Nothing in texts as the rituals and scripture were transmitted verbally.
Nothing was transmitted verbally from ancient times concerning any
element of the cult of Mithras, tho, and indeed one might reasonably
ask who could do so.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
- References:
- Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- From: Roger Pearse
- Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- From: kenney
- Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- Prev by Date: Re: North America's Bronze Age?
- Next by Date: Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- Previous by thread: Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- Next by thread: Re: Pictures of Loc 111 at Qumran
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|